Hey, @Dave I figured out why my code wasn't working! It's cuz the input wasn't appended into the actual document when I set onclick. I have no idea why it matters but it just does! Thanks for your help!

@Carlangueitor Welcome to the JavaScript chat! Please review the room pseudo-rules. Please don't ask if you can ask or if anyone's around; just ask your question, and if anyone's free and interested they'll help.

@Zac Welcome to the JavaScript chat! Please review the room pseudo-rules. Please don't ask if you can ask or if anyone's around; just ask your question, and if anyone's free and interested they'll help.

@AnhNguyen Welcome to the JavaScript chat! Please review the room pseudo-rules. Please don't ask if you can ask or if anyone's around; just ask your question, and if anyone's free and interested they'll help.

@markotom Welcome to the JavaScript chat! Please review the room pseudo-rules. Please don't ask if you can ask or if anyone's around; just ask your question, and if anyone's free and interested they'll help.

@dc5 Welcome to the JavaScript chat! Please review the room pseudo-rules. Please don't ask if you can ask or if anyone's around; just ask your question, and if anyone's free and interested they'll help.

@SomeKittens @Shmiddty appearently we had agreed to do it tomorrow at 5. Not today. Although we actually never said a day at all after I suggested Monday or Tuesday. Odd mis-communication. Hopefully doesn't make me look stupid, but we'll see tomorrow.

@BenjaminGruenbaum I am talking about finding a clever combination and mix of underscore "convenience" functions and then arranging them together to accomplish something that can be done with a straight-forward simple loop

I've been going through the underscore docs but I can't seem to find a method (or nested method call) to do the following transformation:
Let's say I have the following Javascript array:
[{ "name" : "sEcho", "value" : 1},{ "name" : "iColumns", "value" : 12}, ... ]
And I need to transform it ...

@Safira Welcome to the JavaScript chat! Please review the room pseudo-rules. Please don't ask if you can ask or if anyone's around; just ask your question, and if anyone's free and interested they'll help.

I can see how it happens, these sort of bugs happen in the PHP world a lot but I'd like to think node developers use node because they have a better understanding - you only use node in specific cases and those specific cases require a better understanding of how things work anyway.

You have to understand the HTTP protocol to use node, and how user input is passed and why and when. If you know these things and mess up in such a silly way it's your fault.

@JanDvorak Half of how Rails site get hacked is because they don't pass DTOs and pass objects straight from user input to the DB, I never got how people can be so careless. I destructure, check against a whitelist and restructure all my objects when accepting any form of user input.

Hold up, Infinity represents an abstract concept that can't be evaluated, but from what I can remember it can be quantified symbolically by its relationship to other infinite values. Is that not correct?

@monners we can say the difference of two sequences that each converge to infinity converges to zero, but that's not always the case. For example 1,2,3,4,5 and 2,4,6,8 both converge to (the same) infinity.

@JanDvorak (which is a fun way to get e :) ) But 0 is not also by limit in this case :)

@Esailija I don't see how my code (or yours, or anyone else who does node as part of his job) would get trapped in __proto__ (any more than it would with things constructor for the very least which I don't think. I guess I see how careless people might in some cases get tricked.

@JanDvorak That's probably a mistake. When we expanded R to be closed under the limit operator 0*Infinity produced 0 and we proved it was the only proper way to expand it. Then again, I probably want anything * Infinity to be NaN in code.

I said "Honestly" because I don't think it's a very good idea, for instance because it limits code sharind and objects are adequate hash maps in 99% of cases, especially if you sanitize your input properly in which __proto__ would not be a problem.

@JanDvorak Right, but that also dictates 0*Infinity should be 0 does it not?

How do you define multiplication? I think the only logical way is to define multiplication x*y as the limit of any sequence converging to x times and sequence converging to y. That's the same as normal multiplication for real numbers.

(Same as in same result)

Then Infinity^0 should still be NaN since it is defines as e^(ln(a_n) *b_n) where b_n converges to 0 and a_n converges to infinity.